DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I comprising claims 1-16, 18, 25, and 30 in the reply filed on 6 April 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 17, 19-24, and 26 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6 April 2026.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 30 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 6, “the storage module and the refueling interface” should be amended to – a storage module and a refueling interface--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 30 recites the limitation "wherein the refueling platform is a first mobile refueling platform, the apparatus further comprising" in lines 1-3 of the claim. Claim 30 depends from claim 18 which is dependent from claim 1 where claim 1 contains only the refueling platform. Claim 30 is unclear as it is written more as a system claim where it aligns better with the Group II in which is directed towards a system. Claim 1 is more drawn towards the apparatus where the focus is on a singular mobile hydrogen fueling platform. The Office recommends amending the claim to better algin with the apparatus of claim 1 or cancel the claim. For purposes of examination, the limitation will be considered as it is written.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 4, 9, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 20060118201 A1) in view of Cohen (US 6886609 B2) in further view of Nagura (US 20140102587 A1) and Smith (US 20030189329 A1).
Regarding Claim 1:
Li discloses an apparatus for mobile hydrogen refueling (1, Figure 1, the mobile hydrogen generation and supply system is the apparatus), comprising:
a heavy equipment vehicle (Paragraph [0017], the truck is the heavy equipment vehicle);
a platform (60, Figure 3, the trailer is the platform) coupled to the vehicle (Paragraph [0017]);
a storage module (40, Figure 3) coupleable to the platform (60, Figure 3), the storage module (40, Figure 3) storing a plurality of hydrogen tanks (Figure 3, there are a plurality of hydrogen tanks);
a compression module (20, Figure 3) coupleable to the platform (60, Figure 3); and
a refueling interface (50, Figure 3, the hydrogen dispensing system is the refueling interface) configured to engage a refueling interface of a hydrogen powerplant (Paragraph [0027]) and to selectively convey a flow of high-pressure hydrogen from the compression module (Paragraphs [0026-0027]).
Li does not disclose:
the vehicle having a size exceeding highway size constraints; and
a compression module removably coupleable to the platform, the compression module configured to receive a flow of hydrogen from a hydrogen tank from the plurality of hydrogen tanks via a manifold and to compress the flow of hydrogen to produce a flow of high-pressure hydrogen.
Cohen teaches a mobile hydrogen supply system, comprising:
a compression module (17, Figure 1) coupleable to the platform (5, Figure 1), the compression module (17, Figure 1) configured to receive a flow of hydrogen from a hydrogen tank from the plurality of hydrogen tanks (Column 8, Lines 64-67 to Column 9, Lines 1-3, the compressor module receives the flow of hydrogen from the hydrogen tanks) and to compress the flow of hydrogen to produce a flow of high-pressure hydrogen (Column 8, Lines 64-67 to Column 9, Lines 1-3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li to include a compression module coupleable to the platform, the compression module configured to receive a flow of hydrogen from a hydrogen tank from the plurality of hydrogen tanks and to compress the flow of hydrogen to produce a flow of high-pressure hydrogen as taught by Cohen with the motivation to have the higher pressure hydrogen stored and dispensed into other tanks.
Li and Cohen do not teach:
the vehicle having a size exceeding highway size constraints; and
a compression module removably coupleable to the platform, the compression module configured to receive a flow of hydrogen from a hydrogen tank from the plurality of hydrogen tanks via a manifold.
Nagura teaches a hydrogen station, comprising:
the compression module (14, Figure 1) configured to receive a flow of hydrogen from a hydrogen tank (9, Figure 1) from the plurality of hydrogen tanks (9 and 11, Figure 1) via a manifold (Figure 1, the manifold is the pipe connecting to the compressor (14) to both tanks).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li and Cohen to include the compression module configured to receive a flow of hydrogen from a hydrogen tank from the plurality of hydrogen tanks via a manifold as taught by Nagura with the motivation to reduce the amount of piping within the station by having one pipe connected to the output of the plurality of the hydrogen tanks.
Li, Nagura, and Cohen do not teach:
the vehicle having a size exceeding highway size constraints; and
a compression module removably coupleable to the platform.
Smith teaches a combination hauling vehicle comprising:
The vehicle (1, Figure 1) having a size exceeding highway size constraints (Paragraph [0029]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Nagura, and Cohen to include vehicle having a size exceeding highway size constraints as taught by Smith with the motivation to haul heavy equipment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the storage module and compressor module be removably coupleable, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various separable elements involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(V.)(C.).
The applicant is advised that it has been held by the courts that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)
Regarding Claim 4:
Through the above-discussed combination of Li, Cohen, Nagura, and Smith accounts for this subject matter where Smith teaches the heavy equipment vehicle is a mining truck (Paragraph [0029]).
Regarding Claim 9:
Li discloses:
The storage module (40, Figure 4).
However, Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen do not expressly disclose wherein the storage module is configured to store more than 10,000 kilograms (kg) of hydrogen.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the device of Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen to have the storage module is configured to store more than 10,000 kilograms (kg) of hydrogen since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Li, Smith, and Cohen would not operate differently with the more than 10,000 kilogram storage the device would function appropriately having the claimed more than 10, 000 kilogram storage. Further, applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating simply that the storage module having a storage of 10,000 kilograms “may” be within the claimed ranges (specification, Paragraphs [0070] and [0100]).
Regarding Claim 12:
The above-discussed combination of Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen accounts for this subject matter where Cohen teaches wherein the refueling interface (21, Figure 1) is configured to convey the flow of high-pressure hydrogen with a volumetric flowrate of at least 4 kg per minute (Column 12, Lines 21-24, the refueling interface is capable of hydrogen product flows up to 10 kg/min).
Claims 2-3 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Cohen in further view of Smith, Nagura, and Leachman (US 20160146401 A1).
Regarding Claim 2:
Li discloses:
the compression module (20, Figure 3); and
a power module (110, Figure 3, the power generator is the power module) coupleable to the platform, the power module configured to provide electric power (Paragraph [0036]).
Li, Cohen, Nagura, and Smith do not teach:
a power module removably coupleable to the platform, the power module configured to provide electric power to at least the compression module.
Leachman teaches a hydrogen fueling system, comprising:
the power module configured to provide electric power to at least the compression module (Paragraph [0084], the power module is the fuel cell that provides electric power to at least the compressor).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen to include the power module configured to provide electric power to at least the compression module as taught by Leachman with the motivation to power multiple components within the station with the provided hydrogen at the station allowing for the station to operate off the grid.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the power module be removably coupleable, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various separable elements involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(V.)(C.).
Regarding Claim 3:
Li discloses:
an enclosure (Paragraph [0017], the platform can be enclosed) coupled to the platform (60, Figure 3), the enclosure enclosing at least one of the compression module (20, Figure 3).
Li, Cohen, Nagura, and Smith do not expressly teach:
an enclosure coupled to the platform, the enclosure enclosing at least one of the compression module and the power module.
Leachman teaches:
an enclosure (102, Figure 1, the container is the enclosure) coupled to the vehicle (Paragraphs [0027-0028], the enclosure is secured to the vehicle and encloses multiple components), the enclosure enclosing at least one of the compression module and the power module (Paragraph [0084], the compression module (compressor) and power module (fuel cell) are coupled together).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen to include the hydrogen tanks are configured to store hydrogen at a pressure between 200 bar and 400 bar as taught by Leachman with the motivation to protect the components from the environment to prevent damage to the components when exposed to the elements.
Regarding Claim 18:
Li discloses:
a heavy equipment vehicle (Paragraph [0017]) coupled to the platform (60, Figure 3).
Li, Nagura, and Cohen do not teach:
wherein the platform is coupled to a mining truck operable to move the platform to or from at least one refueling location.
Smith teaches:
the platform (10, Figure 1) is coupled to a mining truck (Paragraph [0029]) operable to move the platform (Paragraphs [0026-0027]).
Li, Nagura, Smith and Cohen do not teach:
wherein the platform is coupled to a mining truck operable to move the platform to or from at least one refueling location.
Leachman teaches a hydrogen fueling system, comprising:
a vehicle operable to move the fueling system to or from at least one refueling location (Paragraph [0027], a vehicle moves the hydrogen fueling system to its location for operation).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen to include a vehicle operable to move the fueling system to or from at least one refueling location as taught by Leachman with the motivation to transport the station to fueling locations where there are limited options to refuel a vehicle.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Cohen in further view of Smith, Nagura and Caldeira (US 20130257144 A1).
Regarding Claim 5:
Li discloses:
A heavy equipment vehicle (Paragraph [0017]) and a platform (60, Figure 3).
Li, Nagura, and Cohen do not teach:
a vehicle interface configured to couple the platform to the mining truck.
Smith teaches:
A mining truck (Paragraph [0029]) and a platform (10, Figure 1).
Li , Smith, Nagura, and Cohen do not teach:
a vehicle interface configured to couple the platform to the mining truck.
Calderia teaches an apparatus for supplying auxiliary electrical power, comprising:
a vehicle interface (130, Figure 1A, the socket is the vehicle interface) configured to couple the platform (102, Figure 1A, the towable trailer is the platform) to the vehicle (104, Figure 1A).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen to include a vehicle interface configured to couple the platform to the vehicle as taught by Calderia with the motivation to supply energy to the vehicle to prevent having to stop to supply energy saving time.
Through the combination of Li, Smith, Nagura, Cohen, and Calderia, the heavy equipment vehicle of Li is the mining truck of Smith where the platform of Li is connected to the mining vehicle as seen in Calderia where the vehicle interface couples with the platform.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Cohen in further view of Smith, Nagura, Leachman (US 20160146401 A1), and Caldeira (US 20130257144 A1).
Regarding Claim 6:
Li discloses:
the compression module (20, Figure 3); and
a power module (110, Figure 3, the power generator is the power module) coupleable to the platform (60, Figure 3), the power module configured to provide electric power (Paragraph [0036]).
Li, Cohen, Nagura, and Smith do not teach:
a power module removably coupleable to the platform, the power module configured to provide electric power to at least the compression module and the vehicle interface.
Leachman teaches a hydrogen fueling system, comprising:
the power module configured to provide electric power to at least the compression module (Paragraph [0084], the power module is the fuel cell that provides electric power to at least the compressor).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen to include the power module configured to provide electric power to at least the compression module as taught by Leachman with the motivation to power multiple components within the station with the provided hydrogen at the station allowing for the station to operate off the grid.
Li, Cohen, Nagura, Leachman, and Smith do not teach:
a power module removably coupleable to the platform, the power module configured to provide electric power to at least the vehicle interface.
Calderia teaches an apparatus for supplying auxiliary electrical power, comprising:
the power module (106, Figure 1A) configured to provide electric power (Paragraphs [0037-0038], the power module (auxiliary batteries 106) provide electric power) to at least the vehicle interface (130, Figure 1A).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, Leachman, and Cohen to include the power module configured to provide electric power to at least the vehicle interface as taught by Calderia with the motivation to transfer electrical power between the vehicle and the power module to ensure there is enough charge to overcome more rigorous driving.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the power module be removably coupleable, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various separable elements involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(V.)(C.).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Cohen in further view of Smith, Nagura, and Soles (US 20220173459 A1).
Regarding Claim 7:
Li discloses:
the refueling interface (50, Figure 3) configured to engage a refueling interface of a hydrogen powerplant (Paragraph [0027]) and the vehicle (Paragraph [0017]).
Li, Nagura, and Cohen do not teach:
wherein the hydrogen powerplant is a hydrogen powerplant of a mining truck, the mining truck being different from the vehicle.
Smith teaches:
A mining truck (Paragraph [0029]).
Li , Smith, Nagura, and Cohen do not teach:
wherein the hydrogen powerplant is a hydrogen powerplant of a mining truck, the mining truck being different from the vehicle.
Kemmer teaches a hydrogen truck comprising:
the hydrogen powerplant (32, Figure 1, the hydrogen powerplant is the fuel cell) is a hydrogen powerplant of a truck (30, Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen to the hydrogen powerplant is a hydrogen powerplant of a truck as taught by Kemmer with the motivation to power the truck to carry the platform over long distances.
Li , Smith, Nagura, Kemmer, and Cohen do not teach:
a hydrogen mining truck; and
the mining truck being different from the vehicle.
Soles teaches a hybrid hydrogen power module comprising:
a hydrogen mining truck (Paragraph [0025]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Kemmer, Nagura, and Cohen to include a hydrogen mining truck as taught by Soles with the motivation to eliminate greenhouse gases for trucks.
Through the combination of Li, Smith, Kemmer, Nagura, Soles and Cohen, the hydrogen powerplant of Li is the hydrogen powerplant of Kemmer is for a mining truck as seen in Soles in which the vehicle used to transport the platform seen in Li is different from the mining truck.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over over Li in view of Cohen in further view of Smith, Nagura, and Kemmer (DE 102017214184 A1).
Regarding Claim 8:
Li discloses:
A heavy equipment vehicle (Paragraph [0017]) and a platform (60, Figure 3).
Li , Smith, Nagura, and Cohen do not teach:
wherein the hydrogen powerplant is a hydrogen powerplant of the vehicle.
Kemmer teaches a hydrogen truck comprising:
wherein the hydrogen powerplant (32, Figure 1, the hydrogen powerplant is the fuel cell) is a hydrogen powerplant of the vehicle (30, Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen to include the hydrogen powerplant is a hydrogen powerplant of the vehicle as taught by Kemmer with the motivation to power the truck to carry the platform over long distances.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Cohen in further view of Smith, Nagura, and Roberge (US 20180073679 A1).
Regarding Claim 10:
Li discloses:
The hydrogen tanks (Figure 4, the storage module (40) has various tanks) store pressure up to 15,000 psig (Paragraph [0017], the hydrogen tanks store pressure up to 1034.2 bar).
Li, Cohen, Nagura, and Smith do not teach:
wherein the hydrogen tanks are configured to store hydrogen at a pressure between 200 bar and 400 bar.
Roberge teaches a process and device for filling tanks, comprising:
wherein the hydrogen tanks are configured to store hydrogen at a pressure between 200 bar and 400 bar (Paragraphs [0032], the tanks can have various pressures between 100 and 1000 bar).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen to include the hydrogen tanks are configured to store hydrogen at a pressure between 200 bar and 400 bar as taught by Roberge with the motivation to fill the tank with different pressures from the plurality of tanks.
Regarding Claim 11:
Li discloses:
The hydrogen tanks (Figure 4, the storage module (40) has various tanks).
Li, Nagura, Roberge and Smith do not teach:
wherein a pressure of the high-pressure hydrogen from the compression module is between 400 bar and 1,000 bar.
Cohen teaches:
a pressure of the high-pressure hydrogen from the compression module (17, Figure 1) is between 400 bar and 1,000 bar (Column 8, Lines 64-67 to Column 9, Lines 1-3, the hydrogen can be compressed up to 1000-15000 psia or 68.9- 1034.2 bar).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, and Roberge to include a pressure of the high-pressure hydrogen from the compression module is between 400 bar and 1,000 bar as taught by Cohen with the motivation to fill a tank at a desired pressure before delivery to a facility to have a proper pressure differential.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Cohen in further view of Smith, Nagura, and Sloan (US 20170130901 A1).
Regarding Claim 13:
Li discloses:
The refueling interface (50, Figure 4).
Li, Nagura, and Smith do not teach:
wherein the compression module includes a compressor and a chiller, the compressor configured to compress the flow of hydrogen to produce the flow of high-pressure hydrogen, the chiller being fluidically coupled between the compressor and the refueling interface, the flow of high-pressure hydrogen from the compressor provided to the refueling interface being cooled by the chiller.
Cohen teaches:
The compressor (17, Figure 1) configured to compress the flow of hydrogen to produce the flow of high-pressure hydrogen (Column 8, Lines 64-67 to Column 9, Lines 1-3).
Li, Cohen, Nagura, and Smith do not teach:
wherein the compression module includes a compressor and a chiller, the chiller being fluidically coupled between the compressor and the refueling interface, the flow of high-pressure hydrogen from the compressor provided to the refueling interface being cooled by the chiller.
Sloan teaches a fuel refilling system comprising:
wherein the compression module (310 and 312, Figure 4) includes a compressor (310, Figure 4) and a chiller (312, Figure 4), the chiller (312, Figure 4) being fluidically coupled between the compressor (310, Figure 4) and the refueling interface (316, Figure 4), the flow of high-pressure hydrogen from the compressor provided to the refueling interface being cooled by the chiller (Paragraph [0072]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen to include the compression module includes a compressor and a chiller, the chiller being fluidically coupled between the compressor and the refueling interface as well as the flow of high-pressure hydrogen from the compressor provided to the refueling interface being cooled by the chiller as taught by Sloan with the motivation to remove the heat from the gas before dispensing to increase the filling capacity.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Cohen in further view of Smith, Sloan, Nagura, and Leachman (US 20160146401 A1).
Regarding Claim 14:
Li discloses:
A power module (110, Figure 4) configured to provide electric power (Paragraph [0036]) and a platform (60, Figure 3).
Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen do not teach:
A power module removably coupleable to the platform, the power module configured to provide electric power to at least the compressor and the chiller of the compression module.
Sloan teaches:
Wherein the compression module (310 and 312, Figure 4) includes a compressor (310, Figure 4) and a chiller (312, Figure 4).
Li, Smith, Sloan, Nagura, and Cohen do not teach:
A power module removably coupleable to the platform, the power module configured to provide electric power to at least the compressor and the chiller of the compression module.
Leachman teaches a hydrogen fueling system comprising:
The power module configured to provide electric power to at least the compressor and the chiller of the compression module (Paragraph [0084]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Sloan, Nagura, and Cohen to include the power module configured to provide electric power to at least the compressor and the chiller of the compression module as taught by Leachman with the motivation to power multiple components of the station by the hydrogen on the station.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the power module be removably coupleable, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various separable elements involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(V.)(C.).
Regarding Claim 15:
Li discloses:
wherein the flow of high-pressure hydrogen provided to the refueling interface (50, Figure 4) is a first flow of high-pressure hydrogen (Paragraph [0027]).
Li, Smith, Nagura, and Cohen do not teach:
the power module configured to receive a second flow of high-pressure hydrogen from the compressor, the second flow of high-pressure hydrogen being cooled by the chiller.
Sloan teaches:
a compressor (310, Figure 4), a chiller (312, Figure 4), and the second flow of high-pressure hydrogen being cooled by the chiller (Figure 4, the second flow of high-pressure hydrogen is the flow of hydrogen going to the chiller).
Li, Smith, Sloan, Nagura, and Cohen do not teach:
the power module configured to receive a second flow of high-pressure hydrogen from the compressor, the second flow of high-pressure hydrogen being cooled by the chiller.
Leachman teaches a hydrogen fueling system comprising:
the power module configured to receive a second flow of high-pressure hydrogen (Paragraph [0049])
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Sloan, Nagura, and Cohen to include the power module configured to receive a second flow of high-pressure hydrogen as taught by Leachman with the motivation to power multiple components of the station by the hydrogen on the station from the same hydrogen that is going to be dispensed.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Cohen in further view of Smith, Sloan, Nagura, Leachman, and Roberge (US 20180073679 A1).
Regarding Claim 16:
Li discloses:
wherein the flow of hydrogen from the hydrogen tank from the plurality of hydrogen tanks is a first flow of hydrogen from the hydrogen tank (Paragraph [0026-0027]), a second conduit to fuel a fuel cell (Paragraph [0027]), and the refueling interface (50, Figure 4).
Li, Sloan, Leachman, Nagura, Smith, and Cohen do not teach:
the refueling interface in selective fluid communication with the plurality of hydrogen tanks allowing the refueling interface to selectively receive a second flow of hydrogen from a hydrogen tank from the plurality of hydrogen tanks, the second flow of hydrogen having a pressure less than a pressure of the high-pressure flow of hydrogen.
Roberge teaches a process and device for filling tanks comprising:
the refueling interface in selective fluid communication with the plurality of hydrogen tanks (2, 3, 4, 15, and 16, Figure 1) allowing the refueling interface to selectively receive a second flow of hydrogen from a hydrogen tank from the plurality of hydrogen tanks, the second flow of hydrogen having a pressure less than a pressure of the high-pressure flow of hydrogen (Paragraphs [0032], the tanks can have various pressure).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Sloan, Leachman, Nagura, and Cohen to include the refueling interface in selective fluid communication with the plurality of hydrogen tanks allowing the refueling interface to selectively receive a second flow of hydrogen from a hydrogen tank from the plurality of hydrogen tanks, the second flow of hydrogen having a pressure less than a pressure of the high-pressure flow of hydrogen as taught by Roberge with the motivation to fill the tank with different pressures from the plurality of tanks.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Cohen in further view of Smith, Sloan, Nagura, Leachman, Shimizu (US 20040049982 A1) and Cajiga (US 20120318406 A1).
Regarding Claim 25:
Li discloses:
a heavy equipment vehicle (Paragraph [0017]) coupled to the platform (60, Figure 3).
Li, Nagura, Smith and Cohen do not teach:
wherein each refueling location includes a lighting system.
Leachman teaches:
a vehicle operable to move the fueling system to or from at least one refueling location (Paragraph [0027], a vehicle moves the hydrogen fueling system to its location for operation).
Li, Nagura, Smith, Leachman, and Cohen do not teach:
wherein each refueling location includes a lighting system.
Cajiga teaches a mobile fuel distribution system, comprising:
a lighting system (118, Figure 1) at a hydrogen station (10, Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, Leachman and Cohen to include a lighting system at a hydrogen station as taught by Cajiga with the motivation to illuminate the station to make it easier for the users to see their surroundings.
Li, Nagura, Smith, Leachman, Cajiga, and Cohen do not teach:
wherein each refueling location includes a lighting system.
Shimizu teaches a hydrogen supply system, comprising:
each refueling location is a hydrogen station (Paragraph [0030]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, Leachman, Cajiga and Cohen to include each refueling location is a hydrogen station as taught by Shimizu with the motivation to provide hydrogen gas to various locations for refueling.
Through the combination of Li, Smith, Nagura, Leachman, Cajiga, Shimizu, and Cohen, each location seen in Leachman and Shimizu would include the lighting system seen in Cajiga.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Cohen in further view of Smith, Sloan, Nagura, Leachman, Shimizu (US 20040049982 A1) and Niedwiecki (US 6755225 B1).
Regarding Claim 30:
Li discloses:
wherein the refueling platform (60, Figure 3) is a first mobile refueling platform (Paragraph [0017], the refueling platform is the first mobile refueling platform).
Li, Nagura, Smith and Cohen do not teach:
a second mobile refueling platform being movable to or from at least one refueling location, the second mobile refueling platform including at least the storage module and the refueling interface, the refueling interface of the second mobile refueling platform configured to fluidically couple to a portion of the storage module of the first mobile refueling platform to transfer a flow of hydrogen from at least one hydrogen tank in the storage module of the second mobile refueling platform to at least one hydrogen tank in the storage module of the first mobile refueling platform.
Leachman teaches:
a vehicle operable to move the fueling system to or from at least one refueling location (Paragraph [0027], a vehicle moves the hydrogen fueling system to its location for operation).
Li, Nagura, Smith, Leachman, and Cohen do not teach:
a second mobile refueling platform being movable to or from at least one refueling location, the second mobile refueling platform including at least the storage module and the refueling interface, the refueling interface of the second mobile refueling platform configured to fluidically couple to a portion of the storage module of the first mobile refueling platform to transfer a flow of hydrogen from at least one hydrogen tank in the storage module of the second mobile refueling platform to at least one hydrogen tank in the storage module of the first mobile refueling platform.
Shimizu teaches a hydrogen supply system, comprising:
a second mobile refueling platform (1 and 2, Figure 2, the hydrogen production vehicle and hydrogen production unit are the second mobile refueling platform) being movable to or from at least one refueling location (Paragraph [0029]),
the second mobile refueling platform (1 and 2, Figure 2) including at least the storage module (5, Figure 2) and the refueling interface (Paragraph [0043] and Figure 2, the hydrogen tank (12) at the station is connected to the storage module (5) through an interface), the refueling interface of the second mobile refueling platform (1 and 2, Figure 2) configured to fluidically couple to a portion of the storage module (12, Figure 2) of the first refueling platform (9, Figure 2, the hydrogen supply station is the first refueling platform) to transfer a flow of hydrogen from at least one hydrogen tank in the storage module of the second mobile refueling platform to at least one hydrogen tank in the storage module of the first refueling platform (Paragraphs [0043] and [0047]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, Leachman, and Cohen to include a second mobile refueling platform being movable to or from at least one refueling location, the second mobile refueling platform including at least the storage module and the refueling interface, the refueling interface of the second mobile refueling platform configured to fluidically couple to a portion of the storage module of the first refueling platform to transfer a flow of hydrogen from at least one hydrogen tank in the storage module of the second mobile refueling platform to at least one hydrogen tank in the storage module of the first refueling platform as taught by Shimizu with the motivation to provide hydrogen gas to various locations for refueling.
Li, Nagura, Smith, Leachman, and Cohen do not teach:
a second mobile refueling platform being movable to or from at least one refueling location,
the refueling interface of the second mobile refueling platform configured to fluidically couple to a portion of the storage module of the first mobile refueling platform to transfer a flow of hydrogen from at least one hydrogen tank in the storage module of the second mobile refueling platform to at least one hydrogen tank in the storage module of the first mobile refueling platform.
Niedwiecki teaches a transportable hydrogen refueling station, comprising:
a source configured to fluidically couple to a portion (32, Figure 4) of the storage module (100, Figure 4) of the first mobile refueling platform (30, Figure 4) to transfer a flow of hydrogen from at least one hydrogen tank to at least one hydrogen tank in the storage module of the first mobile refueling platform (Column 4, Lines 50-55, a source is a hydrogen tank that is connected to the first mobile refueling platform to fill the storage modules).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify Li, Smith, Nagura, Leachman, Shimizu, and Cohen to include a source configured to fluidically couple to a portion of the storage module of the first mobile refueling platform to transfer a flow of hydrogen from at least one hydrogen tank to at least one hydrogen tank in the storage module of the first mobile refueling platform as taught by Niedwiecki with the motivation to fill the tanks prior to future dispensing to prevent a potential shut-down at the refueling site.
Through the combination of Li, Smith, Nagura, Leachman, Shimizu, Niedwiecki, and Cohen, the platform of Li would have the portion as seen in Niedwiecki in which the second mobile refueling platform of Shimizu can be used to transfer hydrogen gas to the storage modules of the platform as seen in Niedwiecki and Shimizu.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kapoor (US 9404623 B2) teaches an apparatus for mobile refueling comprising a vehicle, a platform, a storage module, a compression module, an enclosure, and a refueling interface.
Capizzo (US 7602143 B2) teaches a service station comprising a vehicle, a platform, and a storage module.
Mitlitsky (US 7168465 B2) teaches a hydrogen dispensing apparatus comprising a vehicle, a platform, an enclosure, and a refueling interface.
Pick (US 9434598 B2) teaches a mobile fueling vehicle comprising a vehicle, a platform, a storage module, a compression module, an enclosure, and a refueling interface.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANIE A SHRIEVES whose telephone number is (571)272-5373. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday: 9:30AM to 5:30PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at (571) 272-4881. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/STEPHANIE A SHRIEVES/Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/KENNETH RINEHART/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights